PROJ00515

• Contract/PO #: FS0019X
• Contractor Name: Turkey Creek Snowball Creek Project CWRPDA 1985
• Contract Type: Loan
• Water District: 0
• County: Archuleta
• Loan Projects - Doc Type: Feasibility Study

I
I
I
I
I

I
I

I

I
I

I
I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I

Four Mile Creek has a much larger drainage basin than Snowball Creek, and it is
assumed the water quality from spring flood flows would be considerably worse
than water taken directly from the reservoir. Because of this, trash and debris
accumulation near the infiltration gallery or diversion structure would require
frequent maintenance. The inaccessibility of the ditch during the winter could
be another problem. If the open ditch concept were utilized, an increase in
reservoir capacity may also be required to replace stream losses from the open
ditch and flows bypassing the diversion works.

5.6 CANAL REQUIREMENTS

In order to divert water from Turkey Creek to Snowball Reservoir, the
existing Snowball Ditch, which is owned by the Snowball Ditch Company,
would have to be enlarged to accommodate an additional 30 cfs. The
existing ditch ~aries in bottom width from 6 to 12 feet and in depth from 3
to 6 feet. This is due to the changes in grade as illustrated on Sheet 9
of 13 in Appendix B. The maximum capacity is unknown but diversion records
indicate the ditch has delivered 46 ds in the past. This would be
increased to a minimum of 76 cfs. The enlargement would require widening
the existing canal approximately 5-feet and increasing the depth in places.
Approximately 12,000 cubic yards of material would need to be excavated.
The estimated length of canal improvements is 4,200-feet. In addition to
the canal enlargement, the diversion structure used to divert Turkey Creek
flows into Snowball Creek would have to be enlarged. Due to its
inaccessibility, a helicopter would probably be required to transport
roughly 6 cubic yards of concrete to the headworks during construction.

A portion of the canal is on private land belonging to Macht Ranch,
Inc. Mr. Macht said the canal requires maintenance during the spring to
remove slumps and slides. pagosa Springs would have to assume a
proportionate share of maintenance costs. Based on the maintenance cost
for a similar ditch of the Overland Reservoir Company, it was estimated
that Pagosa Springs would annually spend $3,200 for operation and
maintenance of the ditch.

5-6